GPU Comparison

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The single benchmark comparison available between the NVIDIA Quadro 2000 and the AMD Radeon R5 Graphics is the Geekbench OpenCL compute test, and the result is decisive. The AMD Radeon R5 Graphics scores 5,183, while the NVIDIA Quadro 2000 scores 3,898. That puts the AMD part ahead by a substantial 24.8 percent, a margin that overshadows the near-parity suggested by their average scores.

Looking at the broader context, the two parts land in the same percentile bracket at 23 percent versus all GPUs, yet the actual OpenCL output tells a different story. The Quadro 2000's average benchmark score across all tests is 3,898, which matches its OpenCL result exactly since that is its only recorded benchmark. The Radeon R5 Graphics, however, has a lower average score of 3,883 despite its higher OpenCL peak, because it also carries a Vulkan benchmark of 2,582 that drags the mean down.

When placed against their nearest rivals, the Quadro 2000 sits in a tight cluster. It trails the NVIDIA Quadro K2000D (3,919) by 0.5 percent, the NVIDIA Quadro 2000D (3,930) by 0.8 percent, and the NVIDIA GeForce GT 745M (3,953) by 1.4 percent. The Radeon R5 Graphics shows a similar clustering but in the opposite direction: it leads the NVIDIA GeForce MX110 (3,834) by 1.3 percent, while falling 0.4 percent behind the Quadro 2000, 0.9 percent behind the K2000D, and 1.2 percent behind the Quadro 2000D when comparing average scores.

The head-to-head delta of 24.8 percent in OpenCL is the single biggest takeaway. It shows that average-score rankings can mislead; the Radeon R5 Graphics is the stronger compute performer in raw OpenCL throughput, even though its blended average is nearly identical to the Quadro's. The Quadro 2000's only benchmark is OpenCL, so its average is a pure reflection of that workload. The Radeon's average is diluted by a weaker Vulkan result. For anyone relying on averages alone, the two cards look like equals. For OpenCL-specific tasks, the AMD part is clearly ahead.

The Verdict

The data supports a clear split decision. If the workload is OpenCL compute, the AMD Radeon R5 Graphics wins outright with a 24.8 percent advantage over the Quadro 2000 in the Geekbench OpenCL test. That is a large enough margin to make the Quadro a poor choice for that specific task, regardless of its other attributes.

However, the Quadro 2000 has its own strengths that are not captured by the compute benchmark. It offers dedicated GDDR5 memory with 1024 MB on a 128-bit bus, yielding 41.60 GB/s of bandwidth, while the Radeon R5 Graphics relies on system-shared memory with system-dependent bandwidth. The Quadro also delivers higher pixel and texture throughput: 5.000 GPixel/s and 20.00 GTexel/s versus 3.032 GPixel/s and 12.13 GTexel/s for the AMD part. Its FP32 output of 480.0 GFLOPS exceeds the Radeon's 388.1 GFLOPS. These are rasterization and fill-rate advantages that matter for traditional graphics workloads.

The choice depends on the target application. For pure OpenCL compute, pick the Radeon R5 Graphics. For tasks that benefit from dedicated memory bandwidth and higher fill rates, the Quadro 2000 holds the edge. The Quadro also brings a professional feature set with display outputs of 1x DVI and 2x DisplayPort, whereas the Radeon's outputs are motherboard dependent. Neither part is current; both are end-of-life, with the Quadro released in December 2010 and the Radeon in September 2014.

The Radeon R5 Graphics is the better compute buy. The Quadro 2000 is the better choice for memory-bandwidth-sensitive graphics work. There is no universal winner, only workload-specific ones.

Architecture Differences

The NVIDIA Quadro 2000 is built on the Fermi architecture using the GF106 chip, fabricated on a 40 nm process at TSMC. The AMD Radeon R5 Graphics uses the GCN 2.0 architecture with the Spectre SL chip, produced on a 28 nm process at GlobalFoundries. The process node disparity is significant: 40 nm versus 28 nm, which translates to different transistor densities. The Quadro packs 1,170 million transistors on a 238 mm² die, yielding 4.9 million transistors per square millimeter. The Radeon integrates 2,410 million transistors on a 245 mm² die, achieving 9.8 million transistors per square millimeter, exactly double the density.

The Radeon's transistor count is more than twice the Quadro's, yet its die size is only slightly larger. That density advantage comes directly from the newer 28 nm node. The architecture generations also differ in API support. The Quadro's Fermi design supports DirectX 12 (11_0) and OpenGL 4.6, but has no Vulkan support listed. The Radeon's GCN 2.0 design supports DirectX 12 (12_0), OpenGL 4.6, and Vulkan 1.2.170. That Vulkan capability gives the Radeon a modern API option that the Quadro lacks entirely.

The Radeon is an integrated graphics processor (IGP) from the Kaveri generation, meaning it shares system memory and has no dedicated VRAM. The Quadro is a discrete single-slot card with its own memory. The Radeon's chip is labeled "Spectre SL" and its generation is "GCN 2.0 IGP," while the Quadro's generation is "Quadro Fermi (x000)." The predecessor and successor lines also differ: the Quadro came from the Quadro FX Tesla line and was succeeded by Quadro Kepler, while the Radeon followed TeraScale 3 IGP and was succeeded by GCN 3.0 IGP.

Specification Differences

The two parts diverge most sharply in memory configuration and power. The Quadro 2000 has 1024 MB of GDDR5 on a 128-bit bus with 41.60 GB/s bandwidth. The Radeon R5 Graphics uses system-shared memory with a system-shared bus width and system-dependent bandwidth, there is no dedicated VRAM at all. Memory clock differs as well: the Quadro runs at 650 MHz (2.6 Gbps effective), while the Radeon's memory clock is listed as "System Shared."

Compute unit counts favor the Radeon in shading units: 256 versus 192. But the Quadro has more texture mapping units (32 versus 16) and more render output units (16 versus 4). The Quadro's pixel rate of 5.000 GPixel/s and texture rate of 20.00 GTexel/s both exceed the Radeon's 3.032 GPixel/s and 12.13 GTexel/s. FP32 performance also favors the Quadro at 480.0 GFLOPS versus 388.1 GFLOPS.

Power consumption is a major differentiator. The Quadro has a TDP of 62 W and requires a suggested PSU of 250 W, with no power connectors needed. The Radeon's TDP is just 15 W, and it has no slot width, power connectors, or suggested PSU because it is an IGP. The Quadro is a single-slot card measuring 178 mm (7 inches) in length and 111 mm (4.4 inches) in height, while the Radeon has no dimensions listed. The Quadro uses a PCIe 2.0 x16 bus interface; the Radeon's interface is simply "IGP."

Display outputs also differ: the Quadro provides 1x DVI and 2x DisplayPort, while the Radeon's outputs are motherboard dependent. The Quadro has a launch MSRP of 599 USD; the Radeon has no listed launch MSRP. Release dates are far apart, December 2010 for the Quadro, September 2014 for the Radeon.

FAQ

Q: Which GPU wins the OpenCL benchmark?

A: The AMD Radeon R5 Graphics scores 5,183 in Geekbench OpenCL, beating the NVIDIA Quadro 2000's 3,898 by 24.8 percent.

Q: How do their average benchmark scores compare?

A: The Quadro 2000 has an average benchmark score of 3,898, while the Radeon R5 Graphics averages 3,883, a difference of just 0.4 percent in the Quadro's favor.

Q: Which GPU has higher memory bandwidth?

A: The Quadro 2000 has dedicated GDDR5 memory with 41.60 GB/s bandwidth on a 128-bit bus. The Radeon R5 Graphics uses system-shared memory with system-dependent bandwidth.

Q: What are the pixel and texture rates for each?

A: The Quadro 2000 delivers 5.000 GPixel/s and 20.00 GTexel/s. The Radeon R5 Graphics delivers 3.032 GPixel/s and 12.13 GTexel/s.

Q: Does the Radeon R5 Graphics support Vulkan?

A: Yes, it supports Vulkan 1.2.170. The Quadro 2000 has no Vulkan support listed; it supports DirectX 12 (11_0) and OpenGL 4.6.

Q: Which GPU has the higher TDP?

A: The Quadro 2000 has a 62 W TDP and requires a 250 W suggested PSU. The Radeon R5 Graphics has a 15 W TDP and is an IGP with no PSU requirement.